IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX                                                                    : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                                                   : RESPONDENTS

Ct.Cases No. XXXX

                             U/s.: XXXX

P.S.: XXXX.

INDEX

          PETITIONERS

Through

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

                                                          : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

Ct.Cases No. XXXX

                             U/s.: XXXX

P.S.: XXXX.

URGENT APPLICATION

To

          The Hon’ble Joint Registrar,

          Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.

          New Delhi.

Sir,

          Will you kindly treat the accompanying writ petition / application as urgent one in accordance with the provision of as per the Delhi High Court rules and regulations and orders.

The grounds of urgency are as set out in the accompanying petition / application. Kindly treat the accompanying petition for quashing of the proceedings pending before the Ld. Trial Court of XXXXX Courts, Delhi in Ct.Cases No.XXXX case titled as “XXXX, Police XXXX , Rohini, Delhi under Section 19(1)(A) of Insecticide Act, 1968.

          PETITIONERS

Through

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

Ct.Cases No. XXXX

                             U/s.: XXXX

P.S.: XXXX.

MEMO OF PARTIES

1. SH. XXXX

S/o Sh.

XXXX

R/o XXXX,

XX

2. XXXX

Through its Authorized Person/Director

XX,

XX

New Delhi-110001.                                     : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

1.XX            

2. XX

ADDRESS                                                         : RESPONDENTS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FILE BY

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

1. SH. XXXX

S/o

R/o,

.

2. XXXX

Through its Authorized Person/Director

ADDRESS

New Delhi-110001.                                     : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

1. XX

2. XX

ADDRESS                                                            : RESPONDENTS

Ct.Cases No. XXXX

                             U/s.: XXXX

P.S.: XXXX.

CRIMINAL WRIT PEITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. FOR QUASHING OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE LD. TRIAL COURT OF MS. XX LD. M.M.-03, XX DELHI IN COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 200 CRPC BEARING CT.CASES NO. XXXX CASE TITLED AS “XX POLICE STATION XX UNDER SECTION 19(1)(A) OF INSECTICIDE ACT, 1968.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-

1.       That the Petitioner is law-abiding and senior citizen of India and has full faith in the administration of justice. That the Petitioner has sought to invoke the Extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing of proceeding pending before the Ld. Trial Court of Ms. XX Courts, Delhi in C.C. No.XXXX case titled as XX Police Station XX Delhi under Section 19(1)(A) of Insecticide Act, 1968 on the basis of the Complaint U/s 200 CrPC filed by the respondent no.2 against the petitioners.

          Copy of Complaint bearing no.XXXX is annexed to this petition as Annexure P-1.

2.       That the petitioner is aggrieved by the Complaint U/s 200 CrPC filed by the respondent no.2 before the Ld. Trial Court against the petitioners. By this petition, the petitioners are inter alia, seeking the quashing of the said impugned complaint and proceedings emanating there under;

3.       That the present petition has been filed by the Petitioners and the brief facts of the case, necessary for the disposal of the present petition are summoned up as under:-

3.1     The complaint under Section 200 CrPC was filed by the respondent no.2 before the Ld. Trial Court alleging therein that the petitioner no.1 is the Technical Officer of the petitioner no.2 company and Petitioner no.2 company is a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and petitioner no.2 company was engaged in manufacturing of sample in question i.e. Profenofos 40% + Cypermethrin 4% EC.

3.2     It is further alleged that the Company XX being dealer was found selling misbranded Profenofos 40% EC insecticide / pesticide batch no.M-11 which was being manufactured by the petitioner no.2 company. On 19.11.2012 the respondent no.2 visited the shop sale counter of XX at Kanjhawal Road, Qutubgarh, Delhi for inspection of the insecticides as alleged. The respondent no.2 officer purchased Profenofos 40% + Cypermethrin 4% EC bathc no.M-11 mgf. Date 27.03.2012 and expiry dated 26.09.2013 vide bill no.088 dated 19.11.2012 which was being manufactured by the petitioner no.2 as alleged. Complainant took bill for the same and Form No.XX in which details of the sample were taken and containers were sealed and the said sample of insecticide was sent to Joint Director (Chem) Regional Pestricides Testing Laboratory, Faridabad, HR as alleged.

3.3     It is further alleged that the complainant / respondent no.2 received report from office of Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantime and Storage, NH-IV, Faridabad along with the report from the Regional Pesticide Laboratory, Kanpur dated XXXX which was as under; “the sample does not conform to the relevant IS: Specification in the active ingredient test requirement and hence found misbranded”. It is further alleged that the percentage of Profenofos was found to be 29.00% and Cypermethrin was found to be 6.85%.

3.4     The petitioners was thereafter called upon to furnish the justification / reply. The petitioners requested to sent the sample for retesting / reanalyzing. Accordingly, the said sample was sent again for retesting / reanalyzing and it was reported by the CIL Laboratory, NH-IV, Faridabd, that the sample contained Profenofos-33.2% and Cypermethrin 3.41%.

3.5     That Ld. Trial Court framed the notice under Section 251 CrPC to the petitioners for offences U/s 291(1)(a) of the Insecticide Act, 1968. Petitioners did not plead guilty.

4.       Aggrieved from the complaint filed against petitioners, petitioners are moving this petition seeking quashing of the FIR on the following amongst other grounds:-

- : G R O U N D S : -

A.      Because the definition of “misbranded” which is defined under Section 3(K)(VII), and hence framed the charge U/s 29(1)(a) against the petitioners which is not made out. The relevant provisions of Insecticide Act, in order to appreciation of the facts with law is reproduced hereunder;-

As per the Insecticide Act, 1968 “misbranded” means - “an insecitide shall been deemed to be misbranded-if its label contains any statement, design or graphic representation relating thereto which is false or misleading in any material particular, or if its package is otherwise deceptive in respect of its contents.”

Section 29 of the said act deals with offences and punishment;

Clause 1(a) of the said section states that Whoever imports, manufacturers, sells, stocks or exhibits for sale or distributes any insecticide deemed to be misbranded under sub-clause (i) or sub-clause (iii) or sub clause (viii) of clause (k) of section 3 shall be liable for punishment prescribed therein.”

Hence, the present complaint is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.

B.      Because there is huge gap of percentage between first report and the second report which itself falsifies the claim of the complainant / respondent no.2 that sample are misbranded one. Hence, the present complaint is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.

C.      Because the Ld. Trial Court has failed to considered the law and facts and that the framing of charge U/s 29(1)(a) is clearly illegal, unlawful, rash and unjust.

D.      Because the petitioners  relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in M/s Kisan Beej Bhandar Vs Chief Agricultural Officer, Ferozpur, 1992(1) CCR 763; the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in M/s. Agriculture Traders & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr., CRM-M No.2122 of 2013.

E.      Because from Central Insecticide Laboratory (CIL) analysis report dated 09.05.2013 is observed that there is vast variation between the analysis report dated XXXX of Regional Pesticides Testing Laboratory (RPTL) Kanpur and present CIL report which is technically not possible.

F.      Because both samples of same product of same batch were analyzed within short time of approximately 4 months by two different laboratories. In the analysis report of RPTL dated XXXX the Ctive ingredients of Profenophos is found to be 29% and Cypermethrin to be 6.85%. However in the CIL Analysis report dated 09.05.2013 done latter Profenophos is found to be 33.02% and Cypermethrin to be 3.41%. on compression of both the analysis report of RPTL and CIL, that contents of Profenophos has subsequently gone up by 4.02% and Cypermethrin has come down by 3.44% such a big variation is scientifically impossible. This clearly establishes that there is some error in the analysis of the sample carried out by RPTL and CIL. Hence, the present complaint is liable to be quashed on this score.

G.      Because the samples may have been affected by various reasons including human oversight or improper storage during transit, improper method of analysis, improper readings, improper equipment, proper technical standards not used for analysis etc.

H.      For that it is a settled principle of law that even otherwise there is no material evidence has been filed against the petitioners which would constitute an offence, and therefore the said complaint is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.

I.       Because the petitioners are facing the trial from around last 11 years which double triple from the actual punishment under the law without committing any fault.

J.       That the petitioners who are facing the trial in the aforesaid false and fabricated case from almost around 9 years and the evidence is still to be opened.

K.      Because aggrieved from the prolong trial and delaying tactics played by the Complainant in order to delay the trial. The manner the pace the present proceedings are going on which is lethal to 'fair trial' whatever the ultimate decision. Speedy justice is a component of social justice as the innocent being absolved from the inordinate ordeal of criminal proceedings.

L.      Because speedy trial is a fundamental right implicit in the guarantee of life and personal liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution and any accused who is denied this right of speedy trial is entitled to move appropriate application for the purpose of enforcing such right and this Court in discharge of its constitutional obligation has the power to give necessary directions for securing this right to the accused.

M.     For that, the present FIR being ex-facie malafide falls squarely within the scope of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 (para 107. and the petitioner is entitled to have the proceedings quashed on that ground as well.

N.      Because in the present case even if the allegations made by the complainant are taken to be true, no offence under Section 19(1)(a) of Act is made out but in the present case there is no such allegation in the complaint. It is pertinent to mention that even if the contentions of the complainant are believed to be true, the present case does not fall in that preview.

O.      Because it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab” in para 57, it has been held that the position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.

P.      In R.Klayani Vs. Janak C. Mehta & Ors 2009 (1) SCC 516 wherein in para Nos.15 & 16 it was held as under:

"15. Propositions of law which emerge from the said decisions are:

(1) The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding and, in particular, a first information report unless the allegations contained therein, even if given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclosed no cognizable offence. (2) For the said purpose the Court, save and except in very exceptional circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by the defence.

(3) Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations made in the FIR disclose commission of an offence, the Court shall not go beyond the same and pass an order 9 in favour of the accused to hold absence of any mens rea or actus reus.

(4) If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the same by itself may not be a ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue."

It is furthermore well known that no hard and fast rule can be laid down. Each case has to be considered on its own merits. The Court, while exercising its inherent jurisdiction, although would not interfere with a genuine complaint keeping in view the purport and object for which the provisions of Sections 482 and 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had been introduced by the Parliament but would not hesitate to exercise its 13 jurisdiction in appropriate cases. One of the paramount duties of the Superior Courts is to see that a person who is apparently innocent is not subjected to persecution and humiliation on the basis of a false and wholly untenable complaint."

Q.      For that regarding power and jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Apex Court in the recent decisions in Prashant Bharti v. State of NCT of Delhi 2013 (2) AD (S.C.) 89" on 23.01.2013 has in a similar and identical case observed inter alia as under:-

"19. The proposition of law, pertaining to quashing of criminal proceedings, initiated against an accused by a High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Cr.P.C.") has been dealt with by this Court in Rajiv Thapar & Ors. vs. Madan La/ Kapoor (Criminal Appeal No...... of 2013, arising out of SLP (Crl.) no.4883 of 2008, decided on 23.1.2013) wherein this Court inter alia held as under:

22. The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused, at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial. The same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far reaching consequences, inasmuch as, it would negate the prosecution's/complainant's case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence. Such a determination must always be rendered with caution, care and circumspection. To invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section - 482 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court has to be fully satisfied, that the material produced by the accused is such, that would lead to the conclusion, that his/their defence is based on sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts; the material produced is such, as would rule out and displace the assertions contained in the charges leveled against the accused; and the material produced is such, as would clearly reject and overrule the veracity of the allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant. It should be sufficient to rule out, reject and discard the accusations leveled by the prosecution/complainant, without the necessity of recording any evidence. For this the material relied upon by the defence should not have been refuted, or alternatively, cannot be justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable quality. The material relied upon by the accused should be such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation, the judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of process of the court, and secure the ends of justice.

R.      For that the present proceeding has been launched as an engine of oppression with the sole purpose of restraining the petitioner to pursue the complaint filed against the petitioners by terrorizing the petitioners with a motivated and false criminal prosecution.

S.      On the strength of the allegations, it is clear that no offence is made out against the Petitioners as such complaint is liable to be quashed.

5.       That the criminal proceeding is manifestly intended with malafide and the same has been instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance upon them and with a view to spite them due to private and personal grudge.

6.       That the petitioners crave the leave of this Hon’ble Court to raise such other or further ground that may be available to them at the time of hearing of the present petition.

7.       That the petitioners craves leave to alter or amend the petition with the permission of this Hon’ble Court and by way of the present petition the petitioner humbly seeks the indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to pass appropriate orders for quashing of FIR.

8.       That petitioner has not filed any similar petition in the above noted matter either before this Hon’ble Court or before Hon’ble High Court of Delhi or Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

P R A Y E R

          In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to :-

a)  Pass an appropriate order / direction quashing of proceedings pending before the Ld. Trial Court of XX Courts, Delhi in Ct.Cases No.XXXX case titled as XX ”, Police Station Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi under Section 19(1)(A) of Insecticide Act, 1968, and all other proceedings emanating thereunder.

b)  Such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may be deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be also passed to meet the ends of justice.

It is prayed accordingly,

          PETITIONERS

Through

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

Ct.Cases No. XXXX

                             U/s.: XXXX

P.S.: XXXX.

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CRPC FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILLING CERTFIED COPIES OF THE ANNEXXURES.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH ;-

1.       That the petitioners have filed Annexures along with the main petition in order to support the writ petition and the Annexures filed is the true, correct and compared copies of the original.

2.     That the petitioners shall apply for obtaining the certified copies of the Annexures and undertakes to file the same as soon as the same is made available by copying agency concerned.

It is most respectfully prayed that the petitioners may kindly be exempted from filling the certified copies of the Annexures.

Such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may be deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be also passed to meet the ends of justice.

          PETITIONERS

Through

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Sh. XX , aged about ___ years S/o Sh. XX R/o XX , presently at New Delhi., do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

1.       That I am the petitioner no.1 in the above mentioned application and am therefore, competent to swear this affidavit.

2.       That the above mentioned Writ Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India R/w Section 482 of CrPC for issuance of necessary writ or direction in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other nature have been drafted by my counsel under my instructions, while the legal submissions made therein are based on legal advice received and believed to be true.

3.       That the annexures annexed to the accompanying writ petition are true to their respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

          Verified at Delhi on this _____, day of July, 2024 that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Mr. ……………….. Director of XXXX, aged about ___ years, having office at XX , New Delhi-110001, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

1.       That I am the petitioner no.2 in the above mentioned application and am therefore, competent to swear this affidavit.

2.       That the above mentioned Writ Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of CrPC for issuance of necessary writ or direction in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other nature have been drafted by my counsel under my instructions, while the legal submissions made therein are based on legal advice received and believed to be true.

3.       That the annexures annexed to the accompanying writ petition are true to their respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

          Verified at Delhi on this _____, day of July, 2024 that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Sh. XX , aged about ___ years S/o Sh. XX R/o XX Gujarat, presently at New Delhi., do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

1.       That I am the petitioner no.1 in the above mentioned application and am therefore, competent to swear this affidavit.

2.       That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying application under Section 482 of CrPC seeking exemption from filling certified copies are based on legal advice received and believed to be true.

3.       That the annexures annexed to the accompanying application are true to their respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

          Verified at Delhi on this _____, day of July, 2024 that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

Ct.Cases No. XXXX

                             U/s.: XXXX

P.S.: XXXX.

APPLICATION FOR AND ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER NO.1 / APPLICANT NAMELY XXXXUNDER SECTION 205 OF CR.P.C. FOR PERMANENT EXEMPTION FROM PERSONAL APPEARANCE.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-

1.       That the Petitioner no.1 has filed the accompanying Writ Petition Under Articles 226 & 227 of Constitution of India which is pending before the Hon’ble Court for adjudication. The contents of the same are true to the knowledge of the Petitioner and the same may kindly be read as an integral part of this Application as the contents of the same are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.

2.       That the applicant prefers this application for issuance of an appropriate order for dispensing with the personal appearance of the applicant in the impugned complaint.

3.       That the applicant is aged around 55 and the wife of the applicant is under treatment for disease migraine with vertigo with gastritis and cervical and applicant is permanent resident of Bhavnagar, Gujarat and it is not practically possible for the applicant to leave his ailing wife there and come to Delhi on each and every date of hearing because due to said disease she may feel giddiness at any point of time and she needs the applicant available atleast neat to his resident with her all the time and the applicant is facing the trial from around last 9 years without committing any fault.

4.       That the applicant / petitioner no.1 is permanent resident of Bhav Nagar Gujarat and used to come from Gujarat to attend the court hearing and as applicant is the Quality Control Manager and Technical Officer in the petitioner no.2 company and he is the permanent resident of Bhavnagar Gujarat and also working there, he is not personally responsible / direct accused, the said company also having a regional office at Delhi and the AR belongs to Delhi Regional office will represent the case on behalf of the Company as it is not practically possible for the applicant to appear before the Ld. Trial Court at Delhi on each and every date of hearing, due the reasoned above.

5.       That the applicant who is facing the trial in the aforesaid false and fabricated case from almost around 9 years and the evidence is still to be opened and a perusal of the order sheet would reveal that the applicant / petitioner no.1 attended each and every hearing of the aforesaid case where as complainant is not so regular.

6.       That aggrieved from the prolong trial and delaying tactics played by the Complainant in order to delay the trial, applicant is moving the present application seeking exemption from personal appearance on ground of he is permanent resident of Gujarat and he used to come from Bhav Nagar, Gujarat to attend the court hearing and he and his wife are ill health and having suffering from various ailments relating to their old age.

7.       That it is stated that the requirement of personal appearance of the applicant / accused in a criminal case is engrafted for the benefit of the applicant. The underlying objective being to enable the applicant to be aware of the charges and evidence adduced against him. It is well settled position in law that the above beneficial stipulation in law has to yield and give way when insistence on the same becomes counterproductive, oppressive and financially burdensome on the applicant.

8.       That it is equally well settled position in law that if someone is resident from out stationed and suffering from various ailments due to the circumstances beyond its control the benefit under Section 205 of Criminal Procedure Code is to be granted as a matter of course.

9.       That the applicant categorically states that he does not dispute his identity as an accused and undertake to be present through their authorized advocate in the proceeding in the impugned complaint case. The applicant further undertakes not to dispute or call into question validity of any proceeding in the instant case held in the presence of authorized advocate. The applicant further undertakes to be present as and when required by this Hon’ble Court.

10.     That is stated that the relief is sought for in this application apart from sub-serving the ends of justice shall not in any manner delay or obstruct the due proceedings in the instant case. As such for the ends of justice this application which is preferred bonafide may kindly be allowed and the requirement of the personal presence of the applicant may kindly be dispensed.

11.     The manner the pace the present proceedings are going on which is lethal to 'fair trial' whatever the ultimate decision. Speedy justice is a component of social justice as the innocent being absolved from the inordinate ordeal of criminal proceedings.

12.     As stated herein above Speedy trial is a fundamental right implicit in the guarantee of life and personal liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution and any accused who is denied this right of speedy trial is entitled to move appropriate application for the purpose of enforcing such right and this Court in discharge of its constitutional obligation has the power to give necessary directions for securing this right to the accused.

13.     It is also submitted that looking at the age and illness of the applicant, the matter may be heard expeditiously as prayed in a separate application filed by the application.

14.     That the Present Application is been made in bonafide and no prejudice shall be caused to the prosecution if the present Application is allowed by this Hon’ble Court.

PRAYER:-

          It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously be pleased to allow the present application and pass necessary orders dispensing with the requirement of personal presence / appearance of the applicant in the proceedings in the instant case; in view of facts and circumstances as submitted above.

And / or

Pass any such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

APPLICANT/PETITIONER NO.1

Through

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Sh.XX , aged about ___ years S/o Sh. XX Gujarat, presently at New Delhi., do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

1.       That I am the petitioner no.1 in the above mentioned application and am therefore, competent to swear this affidavit.

2.       That the accompanying application under Section 205 of CrPC have been drafted by my counsel under my instructions, while the legal submissions made therein are based on legal advice received and believed to be true.

3.       I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

          Verified at Delhi on this _____, day of July, 2024 that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

Ct.Cases No. XXXX

                             U/s.: XXXX

P.S.: XXXX.

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 482 OF CRPC FOR STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LD. TRIAL COURT IN CT. CASES NO.XXXX.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :- 

1.                 That the Petitioners have filed the accompanying Writ Petition Under Articles 226 & 227 of Constitution of India which is pending before the Hon’ble Court for adjudication. The contents of the same are true to the knowledge of the Petitioners and the same may kindly be read as an integral part of this Application as the contents of the same are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.

2.                 That the Petitioners are having good prima facie case in his favour and there is likely to succeed in it and in case the relief claimed in the present application is not granted the Petitioners will suffer an irreparable loss and injury and the same would not be compensated in terms of money.

3.                 That the balance of convenience is also lies in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.

4.                 That the Petitioners have no other efficacious remedy except to file the present Writ Petition.

P R A Y E R

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to grant stay of the proceedings pending before the Ld. Trial Court of XX Courts, Delhi in C.C. No.XXXX case titled as XX , till the final decision of the accompanying Writ Petition, in the interest of justice, equity and circumstances of the case.

Any other order/relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the above said facts and circumstances of the case.

Lower court record may also kindly be summoned.

Such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may be deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be also passed to meet the ends of justice.

          PETITIONERS

Through

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Sh.XX , aged about ___ years S/o Sh. XX R/o XX Gujarat, presently at New Delhi., do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

1.                 That I am the petitioner no.1 in the above mentioned case and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.

2.                 That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 482 of CrPC have been read over and explained to me in vernacular language and having understood the same I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

Verified at Delhi on this __ day of July, 2024. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No._____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXX

& ANR.                                                      : PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXX                                     : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Mr. ……………….. Director of XXXX, aged about ___ years, having office at XX New Delhi-110001, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

1.           That I am the petitioner no.2 in the above mentioned case and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.

2.           That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been read over and explained to me in vernacular language and having understood the same I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

Verified at Delhi on this __ day of July, 2024. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT